68
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Stereotactic body radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer: disease control and quality of life at 6 years

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) may yield disease control for prostate cancer in a brief, hypofractionated treatment regimen without increasing treatment toxicity. Our report presents a 6-year update from 304 low- (n = 211), intermediate- (n = 81), and high-risk (n = 12) prostate cancer patients who received CyberKnife SBRT.

          Methods

          The median PSA at presentation was 5.8 ng/ml. Fifty-seven patients received neoadjuvant hormonal therapy for up to one year. The first 50 patients received a total dose of 35 Gy in 5 fractions of 7 Gy. The subsequent 254 patients received a total dose of 36.25 Gy in 5 fractions of 7.25 Gy. Toxicity was assessed with the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite questionnaire and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group urinary and rectal toxicity scale. Biochemical failure was assessed using the nadir + 2 definition.

          Results

          No patients experienced Grade III or IV acute complications. Fewer than 5% of patients experienced any acute Grade II urinary or rectal toxicities. Late urinary Grade II complications were observed in 4% of patients treated to 35 Gy and 9% of patients treated to 36.25 Gy. Five (2%) late Grade III urinary toxicities occurred in patients who were treated with 36.25 Gy. Late Grade II rectal complications were observed in 2% of patients treated to 35 Gy and 5% of patients treated to 36.25 Gy. Bowel and urinary quality of life (QOL) scores initially decreased, but later returned to baseline values. An overall decrease of 20% in the sexual QOL score was observed. QOL in each domain was not differentially affected by dose. For patients that were potent prior to treatment, 75% stated that they remained sexually potent. Actuarial 5-year biochemical recurrence-free survival was 97% for low-risk, 90.7% for intermediate-risk, and 74.1% for high-risk patients. PSA fell to a median of 0.12 ng/ml at 5 years; dose did not influence median PSA levels.

          Conclusions

          In this large series with long-term follow-up, we found excellent biochemical control rates and low and acceptable toxicity, outcomes consistent with those reported for from high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR BT). Provided that measures are taken to account for prostate motion, SBRT’s distinct advantages over HDR BT include its noninvasiveness and delivery to patients without anesthesia or hospitalization.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference.

          In 1996 the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) sponsored a Consensus Conference to establish a definition of biochemical failure after external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). The ASTRO definition defined prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure as occurring after three consecutive PSA rises after a nadir with the date of failure as the point halfway between the nadir date and the first rise or any rise great enough to provoke initiation of therapy. This definition was not linked to clinical progression or survival; it performed poorly in patients undergoing hormonal therapy (HT), and backdating biased the Kaplan-Meier estimates of event-free survival. A second Consensus Conference was sponsored by ASTRO and the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group in Phoenix, Arizona, on January 21, 2005, to revise the ASTRO definition. The panel recommended: (1) a rise by 2 ng/mL or more above the nadir PSA be considered the standard definition for biochemical failure after EBRT with or without HT; (2) the date of failure be determined "at call" (not backdated). They recommended that investigators be allowed to use the ASTRO Consensus Definition after EBRT alone (no hormonal therapy) with strict adherence to guidelines as to "adequate follow-up." To avoid the artifacts resulting from short follow-up, the reported date of control should be listed as 2 years short of the median follow-up. For example, if the median follow-up is 5 years, control rates at 3 years should be cited. Retaining a strict version of the ASTRO definition would allow comparisons with a large existing body of literature.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer.

            Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an increasingly important endpoint in prostate cancer care. However, pivotal issues that are not fully assessed in existing HRQOL instruments include irritative urinary symptoms, hormonal symptoms, and multi-item scores quantifying bother between urinary, sexual, bowel, and hormonal domains. We sought to develop a novel instrument to facilitate more comprehensive assessment of prostate cancer-related HRQOL. Instrument development was based on advice from an expert panel and prostate cancer patients, which led to expanding the 20-item University of California-Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI) to the 50-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC). Summary and subscale scores were derived by content and factor analyses. Reliability and validity were assessed by test-retest correlation, Cronbach's alpha coefficient, interscale correlation, and EPIC correlation with other validated instruments. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were high for EPIC urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal domain summary scores (each r >/=0.80 and Cronbach's alpha >/=0.82) and for most domain-specific subscales. Correlations between function and bother subscales within domains were high (r >0.60). Correlations between different primary domains were consistently lower, indicating that these domains assess distinct HRQOL components. EPIC domains had weak to modest correlations with the Medical Outcomes Study 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), indicating rationale for their concurrent use. Moderate agreement was observed between EPIC domains relevant to the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Prostate module (FACT-P) and the American Urological Association Symptom Index (AUA-SI), providing criterion validity without excessive overlap. EPIC is a robust prostate cancer HRQOL instrument that complements prior instruments by measuring a broad spectrum of urinary, bowel, sexual, and hormonal symptoms, thereby providing a unique tool for comprehensive assessment of HRQOL issues important in contemporary prostate cancer management.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

              (2008)
              Update of the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement about screening for prostate cancer. The USPSTF evaluated randomized, controlled trials of the benefits of prostate cancer screening; cohort and cross-sectional studies of the psychological harms of false-positive prostate-specific antigen test results; and evidence on the natural history of prostate-specific antigen-detected prostate cancer to address previously identified gaps in the evidence from the 2002 USPSTF recommendation. Current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for prostate cancer in men younger than age 75 years (I statement). Do not screen for prostate cancer in men age 75 years or older (Grade D recommendation).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiat Oncol
                Radiation Oncology (London, England)
                BioMed Central
                1748-717X
                2013
                13 May 2013
                : 8
                : 118
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Flushing Radiation Oncology, 40-20 Main St, Flushing, NY 11354, USA
                [2 ]Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA
                [3 ]North Shore LIJ System, Manhasset, NY, USA
                Article
                1748-717X-8-118
                10.1186/1748-717X-8-118
                3674983
                23668632
                364b243c-7009-4344-9fce-46275780edf0
                Copyright ©2013 Katz et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 8 February 2013
                : 10 May 2013
                Categories
                Research

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prostate,stereotactic body radiotherapy,cyberknife
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                prostate, stereotactic body radiotherapy, cyberknife

                Comments

                Comment on this article